Botverse

Submit Workflow

submit_workflow

Idempotent

Submit a multi-step workflow to the Botverse workflow engine. Steps execute in dependency order; parallel branches (multiple steps with the same depends_on) run simultaneously. Returns a workflow_id immediately — poll get_workflow_status every 5–10 seconds until terminal. INTER-STEP REFERENCES: pass a prior step's output into a later step with the string "$.steps..output_key" (e.g. a docx→pdf chain: step to_pdf has depends_on: ["to_docx"] and inputs {"source_url": "$.steps.to_docx.output_key", "input_format": "docx", "output_format": "pdf"} using tool convert_from_url). Workflow params are referenced as "$.params.". No other template syntax (${...} etc.) is supported. BILLING: convert-only workflows run on wallet balance ($0.05/step). Workflows containing transcode or transcribe steps require auto-refill to be enabled at botverse.cloud/dashboard/billing (their cost scales with source duration). Workflow definition uses BWDL (Botverse Workflow Definition Language) — schema at botverse.cloud/schemas/workflow/v1.json.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`definition`	Yes	BWDL workflow definition. Must include workflow_id (string) and steps (array). Each step needs id, tool, and inputs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	Yes	Initial status: QUEUED or PROCESSING.
`step_count`	No	Number of steps in the workflow.
`workflow_id`	Yes	Unique workflow identifier. Pass to get_workflow_status.
`already_exists`	No	True if this workflow_id was already submitted — idempotent resubmit.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses immediate return with workflow_id, polling interval, billing demands, and unsupported template syntax. This goes beyond annotations, which only provide readOnly/idempotent hints, and no contradictions exist.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense but every sentence adds critical information: execution model, references, billing, and schema link. It is front-loaded with the primary action and remains structured with clear sections (e.g., INTER-STEP REFERENCES, BILLING).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a complex workflow submission tool, the description covers execution semantics, reference syntax, billing rules, and links to the schema. It is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although the schema covers the definition object's required fields, the description enriches it with dependency ordering, inter-step reference syntax ($.steps...), workflow parameter references, and an example chain. This significantly aids correct parameter construction.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: submitting a multi-step workflow to the Botverse workflow engine. It distinguishes from sibling single-step conversion tools by emphasizing multi-step execution and dependency ordering.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides explicit usage context: poll get_workflow_status after submission, dependency and parallel execution, and billing prerequisites for transcode/transcribe steps. It implies this tool is for multi-step workflows versus single-step siblings, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Botverse tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are largely distinguishable by their action and input source (content/file/url), but the multiple convert_* and transcode/transcribe variants overlap in purpose, and get_job_status vs get_workflow_status could cause confusion. Descriptions are thorough enough to guide selection, but the boundaries between similar actions are not always crisp.

Naming Consistency4/5

All names use snake_case with a verb-noun pattern (get_, convert_, transcode_, transcribe_, submit_, cancel_), which is consistent. However, the variant naming is not perfectly parallel: convert_content/file/from_url use a source suffix, whereas transcode_video vs transcode_from_url and transcribe_media vs transcribe_from_url mix output type and source, creating minor inconsistency.

Tool Count4/5

At 15 tools, the server is at the upper end of a well-scoped set. Each tool supports a distinct input/output route or workflow function, but the count is slightly heavy due to multiple variants of similar operations. It remains appropriate for the breadth of conversion, transcoding, transcription, workflow, and wallet features.

Completeness3/5

The core job lifecycle (submit, poll, retrieve output) is well covered, and workflows have submit/status/cancel. However, get_upload_url references a transcode_content tool that does not exist in the toolset, and there is no way to cancel a single job (only full workflows). This leaves gaps for inline media transcoding in sandboxed environments and granular job control.

Resources

Need Help?